Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Emergency Research (emergency + research)
Selected AbstractsU.S. Federal Regulations for Emergency Research: A Practical Guide and CommentaryACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 1 2008Andrew McRae MD Abstract Emergency medicine research requires the enrollment of subjects with varying decision-making capacities, including capable adults, adults incapacitated by illness or injury, and children. These different categories of subjects are protected by multiple federal regulations. These include the federal Common Rule, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) regulations for pediatric research, and the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Final Rule for the Exception from the Requirements of Informed Consent in Emergency Situations. Investigators should be familiar with the relevant federal research regulations to optimally protect vulnerable research subjects, and to facilitate the institutional review board (IRB) review process. IRB members face particular challenges in reviewing emergency research. No regulations exist for research enrolling incapacitated subjects using proxy consent. The wording of the Final Rule may not optimally protect vulnerable subjects. It is also difficult to apply conflicting regulations to a single study that enrolls subjects with differing decision-making capacities. This article is intended as a guide for emergency researchers and IRB members who review emergency research. It reviews the elements of Federal Regulations that apply to consent, subject selection, privacy protection, and the analysis of risks and benefits in all emergency research. It explores the challenges for IRB review listed above, and offers potential solutions to these problems. [source] Informed Consent and Ethical Issues in Military Medical ResearchACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 11 2005John McManus MD Abstract Informed consent in military research shares many of the same fundamental principles and regulations that govern civilian biomedical research. In fact, much of modern research ethics is grounded in events that occurred in the context of war or government-sponsored research. Despite these similarities and common origins, research in the military has additional requirements designed to preserve service members' informed consent rights. The special nature of the superior,subordinate relationship in the military necessitates careful protections to avoid perceptions of coercion or undue influence on a military subject. Additionally, current legal and regulatory requirements for advanced informed consent significantly restrict the flexibility of the military to conduct research using waiver of consent. This has implications on the ability of the nation to develop effective medical treatments for the global war on terrorism. Nevertheless, work is under way to realign defense research policy with the norms of civilian biomedical practice. Future directions include the adoption of waivers for military emergency research, and the cautious introduction of human subject studies on the battlefield. This paper discusses historical background, regulatory differences, and concerns and challenges of some of these regulatory differences for research personnel that apply to informed consent and waiver of said informed consent for emergency research conducted by the U.S. military. [source] Waiving consent for emergency researchEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION, Issue 5 2005F. Lemaire No abstract is available for this article. [source] Facilitating Emergency Care Research Networks: Integration into the Clinical Translational and Science Award (CTSA) InfrastructureACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 10 2009Judd E. Hollander MD Abstract Emergency care research (ECR) does not fit neatly into the traditional National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding model, because emergency research involves undifferentiated disease presentations involving multiple disciplines and time-sensitive interventions. A task force of emergency care researchers and other stakeholders was convened to discuss the present and future state of clinical research networks. Integration of ECR with the Clinical Translational and Science Award (CTSA) program through a multidisciplinary emergency care research network (ECRN) would obviate the duplication of research efforts by disease-specific or institute-specific multicenter networks and reduce startup and maintenance costs. Strategies to enhance integration must include the training of emergency physician investigators in biostatistical and epidemiologic methods, as well as educating collaborative investigators in emergency care,related methodologies. Thus, an ECRN would be of great benefit to CTSA awardees and applicants and should be considered a priority. [source] Perceived Challenges to Obtaining Informed Consent for a Time-sensitive Emergency Department Study of Pediatric Status Epilepticus: Results of Two Focus GroupsACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 8 2009James M. Chamberlain MD Abstract Objectives:, The objective was to describe the perspective of research personnel on issues of informed consent in a time-sensitive clinical study under emergency circumstances. Methods:, The authors convened concurrent focus groups of research staff and investigators involved in a pharmacokinetic study of lorazepam for status epilepticus (SE). Moderators led discussion with open-ended questions on selected issues of parental consent, communication and understanding, patient assent, and comparison to other types of studies. Focus group transcripts were analyzed to identify themes and subthemes from the discussions. Results:, Most themes and subthemes were identified in both research staff and investigator focus groups. Focus group discussion points were categorized into three main themes: barriers to and enablers of informed consent, barriers to and enablers of actual enrollment, and overall ethical concerns about the research. Many of the issues identified were unique to emergency research. Conclusions:, From the perspectives of research staff and investigators enrolling patients in a time-sensitive emergency department study, the authors identified several areas of concern that should be addressed when planning future emergency studies. [source] U.S. Federal Regulations for Emergency Research: A Practical Guide and CommentaryACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 1 2008Andrew McRae MD Abstract Emergency medicine research requires the enrollment of subjects with varying decision-making capacities, including capable adults, adults incapacitated by illness or injury, and children. These different categories of subjects are protected by multiple federal regulations. These include the federal Common Rule, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) regulations for pediatric research, and the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Final Rule for the Exception from the Requirements of Informed Consent in Emergency Situations. Investigators should be familiar with the relevant federal research regulations to optimally protect vulnerable research subjects, and to facilitate the institutional review board (IRB) review process. IRB members face particular challenges in reviewing emergency research. No regulations exist for research enrolling incapacitated subjects using proxy consent. The wording of the Final Rule may not optimally protect vulnerable subjects. It is also difficult to apply conflicting regulations to a single study that enrolls subjects with differing decision-making capacities. This article is intended as a guide for emergency researchers and IRB members who review emergency research. It reviews the elements of Federal Regulations that apply to consent, subject selection, privacy protection, and the analysis of risks and benefits in all emergency research. It explores the challenges for IRB review listed above, and offers potential solutions to these problems. [source] | ||||||||||